Skip to main content
Glama
ni-c

wikijs-mcp

by ni-c
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Delete a tag

delete_tag
DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a tag from the wiki and all associated pages while leaving page content intact. Confirm with a token to complete.

Instructions

Removes a tag from the wiki and from every page that carries it. The pages themselves are untouched. Requires a confirmation token.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tag_idYesTag id from list_tags.
confirm_tokenNoToken from this tool’s previous, unconfirmed call. Omit it to receive one.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
truncatedNoPresent only when the answer was shortened to fit the budget.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / tag_id / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +2147483647
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.2.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "truncated": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Present only when the answer was shortened to fit the budget.",
+      "properties": {},
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already flag destructive and non-read-only behavior, but the description adds meaningful detail about what exactly gets destroyed: the tag itself and its association with every page, while confirming pages are untouched. The confirmation-token requirement is also a valuable behavioral disclosure beyond the basic mutation hints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and scope, then adds the critical safety clarification and the confirmation requirement.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the destructive effect, the safety guarantee about pages, and the confirmation mechanism. With an output schema present and the input schema fully documenting parameters, nothing essential for calling this tool correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with tag_id and confirm_token both fully documented in the input schema. The description adds little parameter-level meaning beyond saying a confirmation token is required, and the schema itself already explains the two-step token flow. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('removes a tag') with a precise resource and scope ('from the wiki and from every page that carries it'), and it explicitly clarifies what is not affected ('the pages themselves are untouched'). This clearly distinguishes delete_tag from update_tag and delete_page.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use the tool: when a tag should be removed wiki-wide without deleting pages. It also notes the confirmation-token requirement, which is useful procedural context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, leaving routing between siblings to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools